First, before we get to the topic at hand, my client Jennifer Hubbard is hosting an awesome blog event around the Internet: lots of participating blogs are making per-comment donations to local libraries and all you have to do is stop by and leave a comment. The master list of participants is on Jennifer’s blog – it’s a great way to generate money for a great cause!
Meanwhile, you may have heard that Michael Lewis, author of The Blind Side and Moneyball, just published a new book on the financial crisis called The Big Short. The book has received good reviews, but a funny thing started happening on Amazon: lots and lots of 1 star reviews, leading to an overall ranking of 2 and 1/2 stars. Why? People leaving 1 star reviews solely because there is no Kindle edition available.
The actions of these consumers prompted TechCrunch to write a rather direct article on the controversy: Amazon: You Need to Change Your Idiotic Customer Reviews Policy Right Now. But TechCrunch, tell us how you really feel!
Noting that these one star non-reviews mainly just hurt the author, who by the way doesn’t have control over the publisher’s publication plans, Paul Carr’s suggestion is that reviews should be limited to people who have actually bought the book from Amazon – this way people with an outside agenda can’t drag down a book’s rating without even having read it, whether their beef be political or gender-related or Kindle-centric.
What do you think of this controversy? Are the Amazon reviewers just flexing consumer muscle or are they out of line? Do companies have an obligation to address libelous/spurious/treasonous/blank-ous reviews?
David says
The reviewers are way out of line. This is potentially quite bad for the author, who, as you point out, has no control over this.
Kurtis says
People need to take reviews with a whole bag full of driveway salt.
lynnrush says
Wow. I hadn't heard of this happening. That's horrible. I
think limiting reviews to people who have bought the book would help. But what about someone like me, who got the book either from the author or publisher, to review?
I wouldn't be able to go leave a review, right? Because I hadn't bought the book from Amazon. . . Or am I on glue?
Stephanie L. McGee says
Honestly, I've rarely if ever paid attention, let alone heed, to the customer reviews on Amazon. Those people don't know me so their reviews of the book are based only on what they felt. If a friend recommends a book to me, I give it more consideration because they know me and might have an idea of my tastes and proclivities.
Not that the customer reviews are inherently bad. They just don't help me any.
That said, I do think that it's unfair that the book is getting low marks because the publisher hasn't made an electronic edition available yet. How likely is it that the electronic edition would hit the market if the sales of the hard copy are low or dragged down because of some unforeseen factor?
It's a fickle world and a fickle industry at times.
Cameron says
Yeah – this is no good. There are alternatives (like Amazon could list the Kindle version of books and say "Not available" essentially to create a petition-like approach to try to convince the publisher to create multiple editions). Just more fuel to the eBooks – good or bad – discussion (which I posted about this morning on my blog, coincidentally).
Krista says
I'm generally easy-going, but one thing that really kills me is a book review posted by someone who has not read the book. Anywhere: Goodreads, LibraryThing, Amazon, B&N, wherever. I guess I'm for a way to curtail that.
There. I said it.
Jane says
What will be done to curtail author abuses such as getting family and friends to give books five star reviews? Or Authors giving out arcs in exchange for five star reviews? Or authors going around in bands to click "not helpful" on negative reviews so those won't show up?
I hope any Amazon review reform takes into consideration these issues that negatively impact a reader.
Margaret Yang says
Authors often get blamed for things they have no control over–books going out of print, a publisher canceling a series…heck, they even get blamed for bad cover art.
Jen Brubacher says
I think it's a valid method of protest against Amazon. I question how many potential readers are swayed by 1 star reviews without actually reading the review. And it's certainly getting press for their complaint.
Donna Alward says
Hmmm. I'm not sure limiting reviews to people who have bought the book on amazon is the right answer either. I know I LOVE it when a reviewer who has read my book cross posts that review on goodreads, shelfari, amazon, barnes and noble…while it would be nice if people actually READ the book, limiting reviews to people who bought it there doesn't really seem to be the answer either.
I don't know about everyone else, but I never rely on the star rating anyway. I go in and read the reviews. You can tell if it's just hateful and snarky or if a bad review is legitimate and well thought out. Same with good reviews. 🙂
That being said – just because there's no kindle version isn't a reason to trash the author. Geez.
Sangu says
It's outrageous. It's certainly not fair to the author. I know that while the overall score on Amazon doesn't make a difference to me, reviews do. I often read reviews before buying a book, though I think I would discount any by reviewers who haven't actually read the book. Still, it's awful. Writers have a hard enough time selling and advertising without this kind of bad (and false, by the way) publicity. Ebook/Kindle/book formats have nothing to do with the quality of a book, which is what the review asks for. Reviewers should focus on content, not format.
Alan says
Treasonous??? Oh please. One of the first things that new booksellers learn is that 'the customer is always right'. When consumers take the time to leave public feedback about what they really want, the sensible approach is to work to address their concerns, rather than to limit their ability to complain.
Hillary says
Limiting to people who purchased the book would really be a problem for authors as so many court reviews on Amazon from outside sources.
Why can't they just make "not about this edition" one of the reasons a review could be removed?
JP Garner says
I guess I look at this a different way. I don't think that it just hurts the author, it also hurts the publisher. If the publisher has decided to not produce a Kindle version, then I'm okay with the public expressing their feelings on the matter.
Hopefully it will lead the publishers to creating more ebooks and releasing them at the same time as the hardcover. It also may lead authors to negotiate ebooks as a part of their contract.
Roni @ FictionGroupie says
I do look at reviews on Amazon quite often to determine if I want to buy the book. So I think the ratings on there definitely can impact the author's sales. However,I don't like the idea of limiting reviews to people who have bought from Amazon.
Perhaps, they could have two separate boxes for reviews: the content of the book being one rating and the customer experience (if it's available on kindle, if the book arrived on time and in good condition, etc.) being something separate, not related to the number of stars.
Jen Forbus says
I am also a person who pays very little attention to the reviews posted on Amazon, but this practice on the part of the "reviewers" is adolescent. The review should review the given item and nothing else. There are other venues for that.
Limiting the "reviewers" to people who have purchased from Amazon isn't unfair. Those who want to review and haven't purchased the book from Amazon have plenty of other ways to do so.
Nathan Bransford says
alan-
Treasonous was hyperbole.
Renee Miller says
I have to agree, reviews left by people who haven't read the book really bug me. I'd tell you how I really feel, but I want to keep this PG rated.
I don't pay attention to reviews when choosing a book, but I know many do.
Anonymous says
I think we (authors) pissed in the pool a long time ago re: the legitimacy and persuasiveness of Amazon reviews. I've seen enough email requests fly past on various author loops asking buddies to post good reviews to counterbalance bad ones that I haven't used Amazon reviews to help me make purchase decisions for a long, long time.
Amazon stars mean nothing to me.
PaigeC says
I like the idea of only Amazon customers being allowed to post reviews. A good friend of mine was ruthlessly attacked through Amazon reviews because of a twist in her book some readers didn't like. The problem came when a snowball of reviewers ranked the book with one star and then openly admitted they hadn't even read the book and wouldn't based on other's reviews. Proof of purchase would at least increase the chance of an informed review. We’ve become a society that bases their opinions on the opinions of others rather than doing the work and research ourselves to shape unique and informed viewpoints. Amazon reviews just enables that growing lazy mindset and opens the door for defamation based on issues that have nothing to do with the book.
Joseph says
@Sierra
The first three reviews were about the book because they're ranked by the most helpful. You're correct that a discerning viewer can tell the difference between spam reviews and real reviews, but the average shopper isn't discerning. Publishers stress a lot about the Amazon rating because it has a direct effect on sales. Amazon users know this and sometimes use this method for protesting whatever cause they want to protest. It sucks for the author, but it continues to happen because it has in the past lead to changes.
I feel sorry for any author or product that has its rating lowered by someone making reviews about something unrelated to the product. It's not isolated to book reviews. Look at any product review on Amazon, Best Buy, or what have you and the 1 star because of personal preference rather than anything about the item in question happens frequently.
Rather than restricting who can make comments, I would propose they provide appropriate outlets for the kinds of comments being made. Why give a laptop one star if the guy at Best Buy was rude to you? Give Best Buy one star. Have a separate rating system or means for voicing comments that doesn't impugn the quality of the item, allowing users to voice their opinion.
Liberty Speidel says
I think the reviewers are far out of line. Just because you've got a Kindle doesn't mean you get every title available. I prefer to buy most of my books in paperback format. Doesn't mean I'm going to go give the hardback edition a bad rap because the paperback hasn't been released yet!
As to whether Amazon should prevent folks from leaving reviews when they haven't purchased the book, I must offer an emphatic NO. I don't buy many of my books from Amazon, and after the recent debacles with them removing the 'buy' buttons from certain publishers products, I doubt I'll be buying anything more from them anytime soon.
However, I have many friends who are authors. I buy their books from them, get them autographed, etc., and frequently they ask of me to leave them an Amazon review after I've read it. Because most of these folks are self-pubbed (and their books are quite excellent), I'm more than happy to facilitate. But, if I'd have had to buy that book from Amazon in order to leave a review, well, I'd lose something by not being able to have my friend autograph it. (Most of these folks live hundreds, if not thousands, of miles from me.)
Best response from Amazon: methodically removing reviews from Kindle users who are whining. Especially if they receive complaints from the author and/or publishers. With their recent bad press, it'd be the least they can do to improve their self-image.
And, Kindle users need to grow up and get a life!
Kyle says
It's definitely ridiculous. But then I always READ the reviews and don't always trust the star rating. People who complain that the book isn't availale on Kindle usually say they're rating accordingly right at the beginning (and oftentims in the title), so I skip them and look at the ones that actually speak of the book itself.
It's the same on iTunes, because people get mad when they make the songs "Album Only," meaning they can't download indiviual songs from the album and have to spend $10+ to get one song (like WAY back in the 90's when we didn't have digital copies available)…
There should be a "request this book on Kindle" button or something and Amazon should be more proactive abut deleting those bad reviews that have to deal with Kindle…
Steve Masover says
This is a really spicy controversy, Nathan, thanks for featuring it.
Michael Lewis is clearly caught in a bad place on this, but I disagree with the TechCrunch recommendation that Amazon "change its review policy so that only people who have actually bought a book are allowed to review it."
Part of why Amazon reviews work is that they're open. By "work" I mean both that they attract interesting reviews, and people believe the reviews to be more-or-less trustworthy. If Amazon sets up rules and barriers (however reasonable and fair) they risk a perception that the review system is rigged in favor of shills. That would poison one of the sweetest things Amazon has going, i.e., legions of volunteer salespeople. It's worth noting that there must be a fair few reviews that are quite useful but contributed by people who bought a book other than on Amazon.
What Amazon already has is review-reader feedback: was this review helpful to you? There's also a link for reporting reviews that are out of line (as the "we want Kindle editions" reviews are arguably out of line in penalizing Michael Lewis' book for something he doesn't control).
At most, in my opinion, Amazon might build some administrative functionality that allows the site to require "only if you bought it here" reviews in cases where a book is attracting a type of response that doesn't fit the review feature's purpose. That way they fight fires in the places they're burning, but don't douse a terrifically useful and attractive feature that wins them eyes, attention, clicks, and sales.
D. G. Hudson says
Isn't this part of the Amazon package? If the unwashed masses don't like any little thing, they use the reviewing capability to express their sometimes tunnel vision attitudes.
There should be some type of filter or process established to weed out the real purchaser and readers, but isn't that contradictory to allowing the 'almighty public' to decide? I certainly don't look at the reviews to decide what I should buy. Anonymous reviewers have anonymous credentials, so how much credibility do they really have?
Changing the reviewing capabilities would most benefit the authors, so I say do it!
Troy Masters says
The review system is especially terrible for anything that is controversial or political. It's 5 stars if you agree with the politics, 1 star if you disagree.
That said, there's no definitive way for Amazaon to know whether a reviewer has read the book or not. The best they can do is confirm a purchase. But only allowing people with confirmed purchases to review could exclude several people who have acquired the book outside of Amazon, and would have a selection bias — the most "honest" reviews might be people who have simply borrowed a copy or picked it up from the library, and aren't already in love with the author.
So why not just include additional data on the front page, such as the average stars from those with a confirmed purchase? If the two averages diverge sharply, it will be obvious that something fishy is going on, and people will dig deeper into the reviews.
JLC says
As a person who reads reviews a lot. I ignore the "one star" reviews and likewise ignore the "five star" reviews who are usually paid to write them. Instead I look at the middle of the road reviews. Those are usually written by people who actually used/read/came in contact with the item for sale.
Linda Godfrey says
I think this has been a problem with Amazon reviews for a long time; it's the old, wild west there and every reviewer has a six-shooter. (Or five-star shooter)
I've had a person leave a one star review on a book about ghosts because she didn't like ghosts.
There doesn't seem to be much recourse as long as reviews are open to anyone.
Perhaps a big disclaimer noting that reviews may have been written by malcontents, competitors, people with private agendas, evil monkeys or aliens as far as we know might give some readers a more realistic slant on them.
Heather says
I definitely think the reviewers are out of line, but I don't think limiting who can review the book is the answer. There are some people (like me) who might read an Amazon review of a book they're on the fence about before buying, so I think it's logical to assume there are people out there who have reviewed books for Amazon that they've actually read without buying them from the site. Basically, I don't think there is an easy answer to this.
Ultimately, I think I agree with Sierra. Readers who actually do want a real review of the book will not just look at star rankings – it's not how I use Goodreads, even if the ranking is really low. I try to find out why the book is rated low or high. The intelligent reader will only take a few minutes to tell that the star ratings are not because of the book's content. The only people who really care about the star rankings are obsessive authors who are putting too much stock in their Amazon ratings anyway.
Also, monitoring the ratings more closely might get rid of the phenomenon of 5-star rating wolf t-shirts and other such awesome merchandise…and we just can't allow that to happen. What else would I wear to Wal-Mart?
Kelli says
I think it's an unfortunate problem that arose because, quite simply, nobody thought of it becoming a problem. I think that reviewers should have a sense of responsibility when discussing a product. A book review, to me, is about the contents and at the very widest, the author. It should not be about the LACK of product, for this example, an electronic version. I would hope that Amazon would step in and say that the ratings are unfair because they are not rating the product. Or, at least, hopefully review readers would mark the reviews as 'not helpful.'
But I think that people who have read the book, (even not through Amazon) should be able to review,
Matthew Buckley says
This is no different from the one star reviews we saw of video games with excessive DRM (Spore, for example). I say it's never bad to give the customer a voice. Of course, publishers are not in the habit of listening to either the customer or their authors.
This is reason #242 why publishers are increasingly becoming more and more irrelevant. Publishers can either adapt, or go the way of the ice truck delivery services.
Laraine Herring says
As an author with books on amazon, and of course, other places, the reviews do matter. I see one-star reviews on things like – the packaging was torn – the book jacket had a crease in it — it didn't ship on time. These things are service issues that have nothing to do with the book itself, yet I think that's the only venue amazon provides for customer feedback. Perhaps a clearer delineation from amazon: Feedback on service ____ ; Feedback on packaging ___; review of book's content _____.
There are always going to be haters out there & people who won't read the book but still want to comment. It's a shame that there's not more widespread knowledge out there among readers about how little the author has control over in the final product — and certainly in the shipping and customer service arena of the bookseller.
When I purchase a book, I don't pay attention to the stars and the reviews b/c I know how random they are & how much of a book's reception is based on the reader's expectations (another thing the author can't control), but I know many people who do read those reviews & make purchasing decisions accordingly.
We just have to keep writing. 🙂
Henri says
I read the Amazon reviews a lot, so these comments are definitely of interest.
Tamara Hart Heiner says
I have seen stuff like this before and it really irks me. Like people who haven't read a book giving it 1 star b/c they don't like the premise or opening scene. It's a book review! You can't review it if you haven't read it!
MJR says
I read reviews on Amazon before buying the book, but it's a challenge to weed through them to find "real" reviews. Generally, the first few five-star reviews (or more) are from the author's family and friends, which I ignore, then I start getting into real reviews. If I saw a review from someone who didn't like the book because it wasn't on Kindle, I'd obviously dismiss the review.
Perhaps the author should have some way to contact Amazon if they see this kind of abuse and these reviews could be removed because they aren't reviews, just gripes better directed to the publisher, not the author.
Tracy says
I put as much faith in Amazon reader reviews when buying my books, as I do in American Idol results when buying my MP3s (We all knew Clay Aiken was the real winner in season 2, darnit).
It is sad though, to think of the portion of the population using these reviews as a guide are placing faith on something so subjective.
Anonymous says
The reviews are generally useless because individual tastes vary, and these are anonymous rants (I'm pretty sure that axeman21 isn't interested in reading the same kinds of books I enjoy).
The worst are reviews that are paid for by the publishing industry (Harriet Klausner and others) — they are such a transparent shill. Harriet writes 15-20 reviews a day; she claims to be an amazing speed reader, and NEVER gives a ranking below 4 stars. I've made it my policy NOT to purchase any book "reviewed" by Harriet.
Tracy says
Silly me; I always thought ratings were there to rate the book. It's unfortunate that there isn't a way to screen the people who don't know how to review properly. Perhaps Amazon could list a seperate criteria category for format availability?
Glen Akin says
First, I've never understood why anyone with an account on amazon is allowed to write whatever reviews they want to. Reviews should be limited to those who purchased the book. If people want to post general reviews, go to Goodreads or someplace else. Amazon should have some way of telling people, "Hey, this guy bought the book from OUR store, so his review HAS more credibility." And the same goes for the others: "Oh, this guy DIDN'T buy this book from our store." And the final rating should be based on those who actually bought the book. That way spammers can't come on and post crap like this.
Amazon will let this happen. After all it supports their kindle world domination agenda
Linda says
While it annoys me, consumers aren't idiots. If they're reading the reviews, they genuinely want to know what other people think of the book. After reading a handful of "Why isn't this book on Kindle" reviews, consumers are going to realize what's going on. I doubt they'll suddenly not buy the book because of that. If I'm intrigued enough to look up reviews on Amazon, I'm going to see what the bad reviews are about. I just don't think it's going to hurt sales. Especially now that others are highlighting the problem… that alone has probably tripled the amount of people clicking on the link to read what all the fuss is about. Just my opinion.
Victoria says
Oh thank goodness as an author myself I have had many problems with reviews… mainly my family was attacked in one, I was attacked by someone who never read my book, and my 'competition' had friends post bad reviews of my book and recommend their book 🙂 Interesting journey. Most of my reviews are wonderful and helpful but my one writing book that deals a bit with gender issues got many people upset 🙂 There must be a better way because reviews are useful when done properly. I know I like to read them when purchasing…
sex scenes at starbucks says
My book isn't available on Kindle yet, and yup, I have no say in it. (I've had a ton of readers ask me, too, when it's coming out on Kindle. No idea if and when.)
The reviewers sound out of line, but I think curtailing reviews is probably not the right approach.
Keeping in mind that bad reviews are bad for Amazon as well, since people might not buy the product,
Amazon could provide a little verbiage when someone signs in to leave a review, requesting clean language and no personal attacks, etc, and oh, by the way, authors and Amazon itself has no control over the format their book is published in so reviews aren't the best place to address this. That way Amazon has approached the problem politely and protected their suppliers without offending their customers.
Thing is, most customers focus on the product and don't think a lot about suppliers. Heh. I wonder if the general population thinks Amazon is the one who decides if a book is available on Kindle or not.
writtenwyrdd says
I think people trashing a book because they hate the format is out of line as well. But does Amazon have a responsibility to somehow separate the vindictive from the real reviews? Not so sure.
I would hate to see only those who purchase from the site be allowed to review, too. In any case, Amazon has the Amazon Verified Purchase flag that shows if the reviewer purchased the book from them.
Perhaps Amazon might just ensure that a book review is about the book by having a peer review flag for "this review is not about the book but about the format"–some kind of flag for inappropriateness that brings a review up for Amazon review and then removal.
P. Bradley Robb says
Last week, publishing embraced DK's video that says publishers should listen to customers.
This week, publishing thinks maybe customers should have that much of a voice.
Hypocrisy much? Honestly, I haven't seen one industry voice say "You know, maybe those 1-star reviews are a serious sign of demand. Perhaps we should stop complaining about dwindling sales, shrinking margins, and the decline of reading and, you know, give the customer the book in the format they want."
Is the 1-star review crude? Yes. But do customers have any other way of voicing their complaints in a manner certain to get the publisher's attention? The publisher, W.W. Norton and Company, has not made any announcement I could find regarding a future Kindle release.
What then, is the potential customer to do?
Mira says
Fascinating discussion. I'm not sure where I stand on this, so its interesting to read the comments.
One thing that did occur to me: it really benefits Amazon to have people protest over a book not going to Kindle.
So, Amazon may have a slightly different agenda here.
In fact, I don't suppose they'd post those reviews themselves….no. That's taking it too far. 🙂
Kay says
Who said you won't go broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American public?
Seems like it extends to civility too. May the karma they generate find them 10-fold.
worstwriterever says
I like when Amazon flexes their muscle. The all mighty fixtures of the publishing industry don't like getting smacked around by this flexing.
Too bad.
It's a 100% legitimate way to allow customers to complain. I don't feel too badly for the author, perhaps because he is quite established.
I would personally be ticked that my book wasn't available for Kindle, not Amazon's rating system.
J. L. Bell says
Problems like this undercut one of Amazon's claims for superiority as a bookseller: being able to offer customers useful feedback from other readers. As so many of the comments here show, Amazon's customer reviews have lost credibility. They may remain as a way for the customer to maintain the commenters' loyalty, but they're of limited benefit to other potential customers.
Anonymous says
Someone on the Blueboards noted this last week as well. I think Amazon needs to change the policy and not allow such reviews.
It makes no sense. It'd be like blaming an actress because the popcorn in your movie theater isn't hot enough.
Nick says
And once again the Kindlites show themselves to be a bunch of…well, I won't say it here. But seriously. First all this low-price or no-go nonsense, and now one star reviews just because it isn't available on Kindle yet. I'm forced to ask, when did preschoolers learn to use the internet?
In all honesty I never really pay much mind to reviews on Amazon, but then I only use amazon if I know there is something I want that cannot readily be bought in the store. However, just because I don't go browsing don't mean other people don't. And really it's just damn disrespectful, to the author and the publisher.